You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Something came up on my Twitter about 25 Cromwell Street, where Fred West buried a lot of his victims.
The council knocked it down a couple of years after his death and after his wife's conviction.
When he died, did his assets/estate pass to his wife?
Did the council had to compulsory purchase the property from them?
Or is it seized by the authorities in a similar way to drug dealers assets?
Are you 'asking for a friend'?
The authorities can seize the proceeds of crime. If the Wests owned their home before their murders the authorities would have no grounds to seize it.
The authorities can seize the proceeds of crime. If the Wests owned their home before their murders the authorities would have no grounds to seize it.
So would it have to of been a compulsory purchase and money paid to his estate?
The authorities can seize the proceeds of crime.
I’m not sure a sex crime murder would generate proceeds of crime, it would be difficult to measure / prove any pecuniary benefit arising from the criminal conduct.
Google indicates the council bought west’s house and the money went to their children.
Interesting thought.
From a different angle:
Gary Glitter was recently released and just thinking back to his 'being popular' time and the £m's that he made at that time, then I guess if he still has access to that fund, then could live out the remainder of his life in absolute luxury.
If I recall, they crushed the bricks of the house to dust too so as to prevent ghoulish souvenir hunters. Government can seize assets from criminals and the criminals cannot benefit from the proceeds of their crime (e.g., writing a book from prison). There is no reason why the West's children should not have inherited their parents estate - that was not from the proceeds of crime, merely the scene of crimes.
gobuchul,
Yes compulsory purchase: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3593137.stm Not sure what they would have paid for it - they pay market value, but the value of the property would presumably be massively affected by its history (I assume most people would see that as a negative but you never know some creepy f****r might think its cool to live there). Further the building was torn apart by the search teams - my understanding is police don't pay to may good that damage, so you have a trashed house with a creepy past, so its probably not worth more than the underlying land.
Proceeds of crime legislation whilst quite far reaching is only when you financially gain from the crime, not stripping all your assets gained from legitimate means.
drnosh,
yes - although if there are any victims they could sue for damages directly and depending on the claim / success / legal fees etc could have a big impact (c.f. Prince Andrew!).
Gary Glitter was recently released and just thinking back to his ‘being popular’ time and the £m’s that he made at that time,
Christmas Tour soon! 🙂 🎄 🎤
Hah, I recall a work colleague defending Jimmy Saville to the hilt on the grounds that he invented double-deck-DJing.
Classic Nonce's Advocacy if I ever saw it
my understanding is police don’t pay to may good that damage
Tenuous link, but back in my insurance days, we insured a house that was searched by Police during a notorious missing person case.
The family claimed for the damage, which wasn't covered by the policy, but an ex gratia payment was made - several thousand pounds iirc, back in the mid 90s. The Police were very thorough.
The family claimed for the damage, which wasn’t covered by the policy, but an ex gratia payment was made – several thousand pounds iirc, back in the mid 90s. The Police were very thorough.
Presumably, no conviction resulted from it? My understanding is the police will often sort damage if it was made in error or where it was lawful but based on unreliable information etc, but not if they tear your house apart and find a stash of drugs or the elusive murder weapon. Police forces may differ in their approach - several thousand pounds may be cheaper than lawyers arguing for months and having to appear in court to give evidence (potentially about the nature of intelligence etc).
I’m sure there was a fairly recent case (within the last five years), where a serving prisoner won a lottery, and his victims tried to claim financial reimbursement?
I don’t think Gary Glitter owns the rights to his music any more so doesn’t earn any royalties.
Police certainly weren't prepared to make good the damage when they smashed their way into FiL's house "because he didn't answer the door".
He was visiting us, living half an hour away, as they easily discovered when one of them contacted my wife on Facebook within a few minutes of smashing their way in.
Presumably, no conviction resulted from it?
No - they were searching the family home for clues to the disappearance, but they had been kidnapped and held elsewhere.
Jimmy Sav made us wear our seat belts , started a fashion trend with wearing his running gear/ track sui on top and remember now then x
He desecrated the mighty Glencoe tosser he really was
Now then X3 , predictive text making it look like I was giving him a kiss
Wearing his track suit on totp not top
crushed the bricks of the house to dust too so as to prevent ghoulish souvenir hunters
not before someone I know managed to pinch some slabs from the garden and made a barbeque 🙁
Glitter doesn't own the rights to most of his big songs: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/gary-glitter-may-still-profit-joker-sync-not-owning-song-1248255/
A court could, upon conviction, make an order to compensate the victims of the crime: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/compensation-in-the-justice-system
Jimmy Sav made us wear our seat belts , started a fashion trend with wearing his running gear/ track sui on top and remember now then x
Don't forget keen cyclist in your list of accolades!
Don’t forget keen cyclist
Didn’t Planet X buy all his bikes after he died, but prior to the noncey stuff coming out?
Would have to be a hell of a sale to get them shifted…
And the daft sod who bought his roller...
Ouch!
https://news.sky.com/story/buyer-of-jimmy-saviles-rolls-royce-gutted-10467440
Its new owner, from Poole in Dorset, said he bought the vehicle over the telephone "on a whim", but now his plans to hire it out for weddings and children's parties are ruined.
Soz, but 🤣
Was it a Sting operation?
👏🏻🎩
I don’t think Gary Glitter owns the rights to his music any more so doesn’t earn any royalties.
I don't think the people who now own the rights to his music earn any royalties either.
What about all the executives at the BBC who must have turned a blind eye to so many things going on at the time yet kept giving J Sav,Rolf Harris although he taught us of a certain age how to survive drowning by pulling your shirt off and tying knots in the sleeves as you bob about in the water therefore making a buoy to keep you afloat as the water engulfs your lungs as you wait to be rescued from the cold North sea
Of course Jerry Sadowitz called out Saville back in 1987.
John Lydon in 1979
I don’t think the people who now own the rights to his music earn any royalties either.
Not sure if that's true. The famous one was in The Joker. https://www.songmeaningsandfacts.com/rock-and-roll-part-2-by-gary-glitter/
If you don't want to think about criminal artists and their legacy, best avoid Gill Sans font, and take a hammer to the BBC statue too.
Rock n Roll Part 2 has been extensively sampled, too...
John Lydon is full of shit. He says he said something about Savill on air and was then banned from the BBC...but it's nonsense, what he said was impossibly vague, and he was back on Old Grey Whistle Test (one of the two biggest music shows of the time) within months to promote his new album.
John Lydon is full of shit. He says he said something about Savill on air and was then banned from the BBC…but it’s nonsense, what he said was impossibly vague, and he was back on Old Grey Whistle Test (one of the two biggest music shows of the time) within months to promote his new album.
It wasn't that vague... it certainly wasn't so vague that those who knew what was going on didn't realise what he was accusing them of knowing about.
I want to kill Jimmy Savile – he's a hypocrite. I bet he's into all kinds of seediness that we all know about but aren't allowed to talk about. I know some rumours,” he added.
Don’t forget keen cyclist
Didn’t Planet X buy all his bikes after he died, but prior to the noncey stuff coming out?
Would have to be a hell of a sale to get them shifted…
Gary Glitter (Paul Gadd) was trying to live the same sort of lifestyle as the likes of Elton John, Rod Stewart and other famous flamboyant rock/pop stars of the 70's. He was almost broke in trying to emulate these wealthy 'A' listers. He also wasn't well liked and try as he might wasn't really accepted into the 'cligue'. Hopefully he's still broke and ostracised. GG thought he was a bigger star than he actually was.
it certainly wasn’t so vague that those who knew what was going on didn’t realise what he was accusing them of knowing about.
So you had to know to know, that seems very vague.
all kinds of seediness
...is very vague!
Irvine Welsh had a Jimmy Saville type character in Ecstasy, published 1996.
Yes, agreed, that was much clearer.